Sources used in this document:

With this knowledge in mind, thus, one must conclude that the TWS was not successful in this case, and must wonder how risk assessment, and especially risk mitigation in such instances as the tsunami could be made more effective. A clear example is the handling of U.S. domestic security policy post 9-11. This is a clear-cut guideline of how one could handle disaster prevention and mitigation. Though U.S. domestic policies were enacted to secure the borders of the country, they did not necessarily do anything to thwart or prevent threats. In fact, bioterrorism, such as was the case with the Anthrax attacks, was quite prevalent at a time, and can at any time re-erupt. In fact, this is the most dangerous degree of terrorism, below nuclear of course, but lethal nonetheless.

The national response to such threats (i.e. nuclear, bioterrorism) is not serious, as these have not happened and as the U.S. seems to be solely focused on a more 'classic' form of terrorism. Yet the threats are there and one must wonder whether the country, with all its power and its allies, truly has a proper response framework in place. In the wake of Hurricane Katrina, the U.S. was not very effective, for instance, and this cannot happen again, especially with the aforementioned, wide-reaching threats. As seen from the disaster in Japan, any country, no matter how advanced, can suffer a disaster, and the U.S. should modify its response towards the threats that have arisen in order to be more effective in its potential threat response, no matter the degree or seriousness of the attacks perpetrated.

"The Tsunami Warning System." Earth and Space Sciences at the University of Washington. Web. 15 Feb. 2012. <http://www.ess.washington.edu/tsunami/general/warning/warning.html>.